similar to: redhat-lsb

when i checked the SPEC file for redhat-lsb i did a search for postfix and it didnt find anything...how can there be a postfix dep if its not mentioned in the SPEC file for redhat-lsb?

Is it possible to eliminate the postfix dep that is required to update to the latest redhat-lsb rpm when upgrading to 3.4 can i just download the source and remove the postfix dep and rebuild, and update the redhat-lsb rpm on my system. i dont think that the post fix dep was there when i updated to 3.3 from 3.1

Ok so your saying to just remove the redhat-lsb rpm. But, am I suppose to have that rpm for some reason...i can eliminate more packages from my system if i do remove the redhat-lsb rpm. I just though it was a required back that shouldnt be removed from the system...

On 04/02/2015 01:28 PM, Phelps, Matthew wrote: > > Soliciting our feedback *before* changing everything regarding release > names would > have been nice. We did. http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/2015-February/012873.html -- Jim Perrin The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77

I have need to use the old network-scripts and not NetworkManager. I did yum install network-scripts, I have ifcfg-eth0 set for ONBOOT=yes but it is not starting on boot. What have I missed ? Jerry

CentOS Errata and Bugfix Advisory 2014:1270 Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2014-1270.html The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename ) x86_64: 6637f912283e727dbb61803200b26ad1974e4ed1c254d8cb315d79be3cb052f6 redhat-lsb-4.1-27.el7.i686.rpm

Hi all, Would anyone know if CentOS 4 and 5 is LSB certified? I have not found any info on RH being LSB certified either. Is RH also LSB certified? In case you need to know, I am compiling a list of LSB certified Linux just for comparison as to who would want to be LSB certified. Just to see if it matters to ppl if it matters to be certified. --- Join OSCC MAMPU Mailing Lists

CentOS Errata and Bugfix Advisory 2013:0448 Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2013-0448.html The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename ) i386: 240d5f608ee00f4d0e66c400dfc28e9ae53369d34d1dff53b3f252e06f053960 redhat-lsb-4.0-7.el6.centos.i686.rpm

I found out today that Google Chrome is now available for Linux. However, and this is a big but: $ sudo rpm -ivh google-chrome-beta_current_x86_64.rpm Password: warning: google-chrome-beta_current_x86_64.rpm: Header V3 DSA signature: NOKEY, key ID 7fac5991 error: Failed dependencies: lsb >= 3.2 is needed by google-chrome-beta-4.0.249.30-33928.x86_64 xdg-utils is needed by

Hey All, Could someone provide a URL to a page that states what LSB level RHEL/CentOS 6.4 is certified to. I'm looking to download a driver: http://www.openprinting.org/printer/Epson/Epson-WorkForce_1100 They offer a driver for LSB 3.1 or LSB 3.2. I'm hoping that one of those applies to CentOS 6.4. -- _ ?v? /(_)\ ^ ^ Mark LaPierre Registered Linux user No #267004

Hi, it seems that Facter 1.6.9 complains that "No LSB modules are available." on every run. This is on Ubuntu 10.04 and 12.04, probably others as well. This message (on stderr) usually comes from calling "lsb_release -v" when no additional LSB modules are installed. Facter apparently calls "lsb_release -v -s" in facter/lsbrelease.rb. This is neither fatal nor

From: Rodrigo Barbosa <rodrigob at suespammers.org> > There is nothing wrong with using X11 at runlevel 3. The only thing > that can't be present is a display manager (KDM, XDM, GDM etc). That's _exactly_ what I'm talking about. Run-level 3 starts xdm. Several Linux distros use 2 for multi-user, 3 for multi-user w/X. Run-level 2 as multi-user w/o networking or w/o NFS was

I just realized that if you don''t have redhat-lsb on your (Fedora 7) box, all those lsb* facts don''t show up. Should I make redhat-lsb a requirement for the facter rpm to guard against that ? David

Hi all, I have a Cent OS 5 box with a fairly full install which I'm trying to strip down. Since this machine will be running headless I would like to remove all of the X11 stuff which is installed on it. However, it seems that the "redhat-lsb" package, which I would like to keep, is dependent on X11 - redhat-lsb depends on /usr/bin/lpr - /usr/bin/lpr is provided by cups -

Hi All, In the example42 modules, I noticed the following is done: # Calculate OS version (without using lsb facts) $ossplit=split($operatingsystemrelease, ''[.]'') $osver=$ossplit[0] I''ve been using $lsbmajdistrelease in all my configs. Is there any particular reason why I might want to use the above instead? (apart from the dependency on redhat-lsb, which is

Hi Ocsinventory http://www.ocsinventory-ng.org/ might be considered if not then I could also recommend Spacewalk http://www.redhat.com/spacewalk/? for something like this both runs well on Centos Per E-mail: per at norhex.com [1] http://www.linkedin.com/in/perqvindesland [2] --- Original message follows --- SUBJECT:?[CentOS] Tracking updates FROM: ?Martin Spinassi TO:?"CentOS mailing

I have 2 RHEL 5.4 systems where all facter lsb* items are missing. Any ideas? Sanitized facter output: architecture => i386 domain => missyou.edu facterversion => 1.5.7 fqdn => broken.missyou.edu hardwareisa => i686 hardwaremodel => i686 hostname => broken id => root interfaces => eth0,sit0 ipaddress => 1.2.1.5 ipaddress_eth0 => 1.2.1.5 is_virtual => true

Hello, Apologies in advance if this is not the appropriate forum for this post. My problem is I'm not able to install the package "GPLOTS". Below are the outputs for the commands: sessionInfo() and install.packages("gplots",dependencies=TRUE). It seems the package "GDATA" is part of the problem but I'm not an expert in this. The "GDATA" package

Hi all, If I try yum grouplist "FTP Server" I get the next large output: Dependencies Resolved ============================================================================= Package Arch Version Repository Size ============================================================================= Installing: OpenIPMI x86_64

Long story short, the core team doesn't need to be in the business of micro-managing wiki permissions. We've not been that good at it during the best of times, and as the 6.6 build process is showing we've clearly let some stuff slip without following up on it appropriately here. What I'd propose is that 3-4 people who have been around the distribution a while (perhaps John